| 1 |
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 02:54:08AM +0200, Ioannis Aslanidis wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 6/9/06, Grant Goodyear <g2boojum@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> >So, what would people think of moving herds.xml from gentoo/misc into |
| 4 |
> >the portage tree, with the rationale being that local tools could use |
| 5 |
> >that information for various useful purposes (compiling statistics, |
| 6 |
> >doing something that I can't think of right now, whatever)? |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> How exactly would that be performed and what negative effects would |
| 10 |
> the change produce? |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Couple of ways- either |
| 13 |
1) actual cvs move of the file. Changes required are updating any |
| 14 |
scripts relying on the existing cvs location (namely |
| 15 |
http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/metastructure/herds/herds.xml) |
| 16 |
2) placing a copy of the file in the rsync image. Downside, any tool |
| 17 |
reliant on herds.xml being in the tree will not behave perfectly for |
| 18 |
cvs users (they don't get the metadata directory typically). |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
One additional to this- the location for the file in the tree *should* |
| 21 |
be metadata/ - shoving it into profiles is the wrong location (it's |
| 22 |
not profile data, it's repo metadata). |
| 23 |
~harring |
Archives